Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Lord Harry 1,633

Lord Harry
1,633

Upon further reflection I am inclined to consider that there may have been transoceanic trade in boomerangs between the Egyptians and the aboriginal population of Australia. The similarities between boomerangs and the throw sticks used to hunt waterfowl on the Nile Delta are uncanny.

I admit to initially being skeptical of the Gosford Glyphs. However, during a recent holiday excursion in Australia I had the opportunity to observe the glyphs first hand and cam personally attest to their authenticity. My translation of the glyphs have revealed that the document describes a trading expedition during the reign of Khufu bearing gold, incense and natron in exchange for boomerangs, eucalyptus wood, and marsupial pelts.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Lord Harry 1,633

Lord Harry
1,633

I agree with your above wholeheartedly. Which is why I was initially dismissive of the Gosford glyphs. However, I have had the privilege of examining and translating this unique document personally and am in a unique position to vouche for its authenticity.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

kmt_sesh 35,685

kmt_sesh
35,685

I agree with your above wholeheartedly. Which is why I was initially dismissive of the Gosford glyphs. However, I have had the privilege of examining and translating this unique document personally and am in a unique position to vouche for its authenticity.

Are you trying to breathe new life into this stale old thread and its comical premise? You know, such a post is likely to excite and encourage the resident fringies.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Kenemet 8,534

Kenemet
8,534

That there is some proposal that there was AE contact in Australia in the distant past. Until I fully read this thread I thought it was a massive troll job.

It is a troll job. They caught the guy who carved them (as has been explained many times) and since then, the site has been added to by others who think they can help the proof by putting Egyptian-looking stuff on the rock.

Anyone who's taken courses in Egyptology can spot that there's nothing genuine there.

2

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Kenemet 8,534

Kenemet
8,534

I agree with your above wholeheartedly. Which is why I was initially dismissive of the Gosford glyphs. However, I have had the privilege of examining and translating this unique document personally and am in a unique position to vouche for its authenticity.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

kmt_sesh 35,685

kmt_sesh
35,685

It is a troll job. They caught the guy who carved them (as has been explained many times) and since then, the site has been added to by others who think they can help the proof by putting Egyptian-looking stuff on the rock.

Anyone who's taken courses in Egyptology can spot that there's nothing genuine there.

I did research for a four-part article in my blog about Gosford. I had the assistance of an Aussie from that area, who knows tons more than I do about its history. I can't recall all of the particulars (they're in my blog) but I recall that the glyphs started appearing in the 1970s. Or was it the '80s? That's CE, not BCE. I recall that it started among some college students, or some such. But I've never heard that someone was caught in the act.

Whatever the case, it's agreed the Gosford glyphs are fake. Anyone with any Egyptology training knows that for a fact. Moreover, several Egyptologists have weighed in and promounced them fake.

It's well understood that Gosford is a sloppy, half-witted hoax.

Nevertheless, that four-part article of mine generates more traffic on my blog than any of my other articles. It surprises me the degree of passion the fringe crowd brings to their beliefs about these fake glyphs.

Strangely, my next most-popular article is the one I did on circumcision in ancient Egypt. People seem too interested in that.

2

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Kenemet 8,534

Kenemet
8,534

I did research for a four-part article in my blog about Gosford. I had the assistance of an Aussie from that area, who knows tons more than I do about its history. I can't recall all of the particulars (they're in my blog) but I recall that the glyphs started appearing in the 1970s. Or was it the '80s? That's CE, not BCE. I recall that it started among some college students, or some such. But I've never heard that someone was caught in the act.

Whatever the case, it's agreed the Gosford glyphs are fake. Anyone with any Egyptology training knows that for a fact. Moreover, several Egyptologists have weighed in and promounced them fake.

It's well understood that Gosford is a sloppy, half-witted hoax.

Nevertheless, that four-part article of mine generates more traffic on my blog than any of my other articles. It surprises me the degree of passion the fringe crowd brings to their beliefs about these fake glyphs.

Strangely, my next most-popular article is the one I did on circumcision in ancient Egypt. People seem too interested in that.

Noticed a mistake in the first few paragraphs of the article. The author claims that most Egyptologists are unable to read the earliest version of the Egyptian script since they are trained to read Middle Egyptian and the progressively later scripts. This isn't true, as Old Egyptian differs relatively little from late Egyptian. The major differences being the former triples the determinative to indicate the plural and uses archaic, though nevertheless recognizable pronouns.